Posted on 06/05/2006 4:51:21 PM PDT by Spiff
House Republicans vs. Senator Frist’s amnesty plan.
By Rep. Tom Tancredo
The United States Congress stands at a historic crossroads on immigration policy. Two roads diverge. Will the nation get another amnesty program or will it get secure borders to halt illegal entry into our country? House Republicans must choose, because they can’t have both.
The recently passed Senate bill giving amnesty to 12-15 million illegal aliens presents a challenge to House Republicans, but it also presents an opportunity. The House should respond with a strong reaffirmation of the enforcement-first strategy for border control and immigration-law enforcement, an approach strongly favored by a large majority of the American people. If House Republicans abandon that path, they will invite the desertion of their conservative base and the certain loss of the House in the November elections.
Senate Democrats voted 38 to 4 for the amnesty bill, while a majority of Senate Republicans rejected it. The amnesty bill is clearly a Democrat bill that passed with Republican support, thanks to Sen. Frist’s machinations. House Republicans must refuse to drink Bill Frist’s Kool Aid concoction—not even a tiny spoonful labeled “amnesty lite.”
Last December, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 4437, a bill that embodies the enforcement-first strategy for border control and immigration enforcement. The Senate bill takes the exact opposite approach. The two bills are polar opposites not only in text but also in spirit and in purpose. For this reason it is impractical and delusional to try to marry one to the other. Despite the advances of modern science, we do not yet have the capacity to marry a snake to a hawk and produce an eagle.
The crux of the problem is that in the deceptively packaged Senate bill, border control is there as a promise but amnesty is guaranteed, immediate, and irreversible. That is the formula that failed in the 1986 amnesty program, and the House must not buy that pig-in-a-poke again. In such omnibus plans, enforcement can be delayed, diluted, and sabotaged in numerous ways. That is why “enforcement first” is not a slogan—it is an urgent necessity.
The American people expect more from the “People’s House” than joining the Senate’s sellout to the cheap-labor lobby and the American Immigration Lawyers Association. If House Republicans do not answer that call to duty, we will deserve neither our citizens’ respect nor their votes.
There is one sure way to derail the Senate’s amnesty bill: The House Republican leadership should tell the Senate we will not go to conference on the Senate bill. The House should simply challenge the Senate to act on H.R. 4437. Until the Senate sends the House an enforcement-only bill, we have nothing to conference about.
A few Republicans in the House have called for compromise by suggesting clever plans that amount to “amnesty lite.” Down that path lies disaster because “enforcement first” cannot be compromised: Either Congress secures the borders before considering new guest-worker plans or we create a guest-worker program on the mere promise of border security. Genuine enforcement cannot be a mere part of a “comprehensive bill,” it must precede any other reform. House Republicans who break ranks with HR 4437 are choosing a path of certain catastrophe—for the nation in the long run and for our party in November.
If House Republicans take the enforcement first platform to the American people in November, they can win. There is no advantage whatsoever for Republicans in agreeing to write a bad bill in conference on the premise that even a bad bill is better than no bill at all. That is the argument we hear from the White House and it is sheer nonsense. The president does not have to face the voters in November, we do. The president lost all credibility on immigration reform in March 2005 when he called the Minutemen “vigilantes” with Vicente Fox standing at his side. It is time for the president to put his attack dogs on a short leash and let House Republicans chart their own course.
Fate has given the House of Representatives the task of rescuing our national sovereignty and our children’s futures from the Senate’s folly. There are signs we may be up to the challenge, but if we are not, neither history nor the voters will forgive us.
—Rep. Tom Tancredo represents Colorado’s 6th district and is chairman of the 97-member Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
"So. Tommy has a choice. He can back Pence's bill as a starting point, of he can have his issue in a minority Republican House. Which means he won't get jack."
Except he seems to know that no bill is better than the Amnesty and Cheap Labor bill from the senate.
"No bill will be death for the Republicans in November. Tom Davis has said that, and so have others."
I do not know a single republican, and darned few independents, who are clammering for an immigration bill. I do know a LOT of folk who are demanding border control.
I submit that your reading of the public is a bit off. If the Amnesty and Cheap Labor bill passes, we lose the House for sure and perhaps the Senate. I would say both for sure but too many senators are not up for election this year so they can pander to the wine and cheese cheap labor wing of the republican party, all 5% of it.
"You're engaged in wishful thinking. Voters will say "the Senate is reasonable, the House is not." It would be very easy to write a few ads, in fact, that point that out.House candidates in marginal districts will get clobber"
Don't you ever talk to folk in the real world? That is fantasy. The only folk who like this are democrats and wine and cheese cheap labor check writing republicans...all 5% of them.
That's what I want. I told Frist... and the Senate Republicans the same thing a month ago.
I would vote for Congressman Tancredo for president.
Facts support rational argument. But screaming "racist" "bushbot" or "drama queen" is not a substitute for either one.
Right on time. Is that the best you can do? Weak stuff. Truly weak.
"So a guest worker program is going to kill our country"
No, 60,000,000 new legal immigrants and 10 million amnestied illegals over the next 20 years will.
Quincy de Mayo will long be remembered as the day the President surrendered in the war of the reconquista.
"As to this number of 20 to 60 million. I dont see any mumbers approaching 60 million in the next 20 years. I have read the Heritage report where alot of these numbers are based on. I find their reasoning a bit flawed. I think the CBO numbers even if a bit low is closer."
Well lets see...in 1986 we granted amnesty to 2 million and had a sham enforcement program. Today we have at least 12 million in the pipeline for amnesty...that was a 600% growth in the invasion and millions of legal immigrants over 20 years. Now you say the Heritage Foundation is off, Ok, lets assume the new program works as well as the old. That would result in Amnesty for 8-10 million, legal immigration for tens of milions more and perhaps tens of milions of additional illegals over the next 20 years....Yep, the CBO has it right. They are close. Of course, the Amnesty and cheap Labor Bill removes almost every legal immigration cap and the border control is a sham, but heck...that's OK, why worry, be Happy.
Geeze
"Open borders" can also mean encouraging illegals to come here, expressing concern for their "plight" as opposed to concern for the destruction they wreak on our neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, etc., cooperating with the corrupt Mexican elite to help them sneak in as easily as possible, not enforcing current immigration laws, rewarding illegals with a "path to citizenship," and thereby encouraging much more illegal immigration, and on and on.
"Uh Bush won 30% of Hispanics in 2004. That is the largest minority vote the GOP has. If you think we can win without the Hispanic vote you are nuts."
And that is how many votes? 5 million, 6? Now compare that to the loss of 10 million or so of the base.
Next remember this is an off year election. Who turns out...the base. No base, no win.
I would like to remind you this years elections should not be a referendum on what we think of President Bush's actions regarding spending and shamnesty. It is a chance in the primaries to support conservative candidates.
Where an incumbent is running "unopposed" if he is not Conservative, skip his name. These people study results very carefully and will notice any significant drop from overall voter numbers.
In November, It may be neccessary to hold your nose and vote. whatever you do I urge you to vote. Don't hold your local politicians responsible for McCain,Chafee, Voinivich,Brownback,graham and the other RINO's supporting the senate crap.
How many for being mentally unfit?
Nice sign up date.
Did he? Pretty hard to shake being "crazy". I guess we'll see who voters send farther.
Tancredo will fold Nationally, yet the FRigilantes will send him money and votes.
He wouldn't get as many votes as Pat but could do more damage.
You can do it, I have confidence in you.
There is more of a chance for a McCain, third party attempt than Tom Tancredo. Personally I truly hope McCain will make that choice.
For one: He would not be the GOP candidate,
and two: He would take more votes from Hilliary or clone than from the Republican party.
Just like the House hanging in there since reasonable people will know the Senate gave us crap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.